On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 02:17:07PM +0100, Frank K?ster wrote: > >> > the DFSG does not require convenience. it requires freedom. lack of > >> > convenience DOES NOT equate to non-free. > >> > >> True; however, Frank said "it would be more than inconvenient", which > >> does not say he thinks that the main problem is lack of convenience > >> here. > > > > i guess english is not your native language. "more than inconvenient" is > > a colloquialism for "extremely bloody inconvenient" or worse. i.e. "more > > than" is another way of saying "very". > > It's also not my native language, and indeed with "more than" I meant > "not only extremely bloody, but even something else" (i.e. non-free).
well, then, if you're going to make such a claim then back it up with reasoning, logic, and evidence. you might think that makes it non-free but you've provided no reason for anyone to accept your opinion. an unsupported assertion is worthless. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (part time cyborg) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
